Swede said they're exploring bitfunder and that's what it looks like but we've heard nothing (that I know of anyway) from bitfunder on whether it's going to be allowed and what the method of transfer would be.

I can say this though: there's no way in hell I'm transferring my shares to any of the labcoin team at this point for transfer on btct. If a transfer happens, it needs to be through a trusted third party entity like Ukyo or burnside (or a collab between them) or perhaps as direct shares as an interim to bitfunder.

You are right. Those coins landed in Labcoin's wallet, but we don't know when they were mined. Labcoin set their threshold for hourly payouts to .05 BTC and the other transactions you have spotted were probably a surplus which was manually (?) pushed. Some days ago they were visible in the team ranking under the name "labcoin", but I didn't saw them in the last hours. This means their hashrate never exceeded approximately 680 GH/s or those weren't mined under the team banner "labcoin".

What's really amusing about this situation is that even if Sam came in here and said the chips are half fucked but we have an engineer on route to help us fix the situation, then the stock would double in price.

I think he wants the stock low now, I bet the team are buying now and will end up with 50% of the company on the cheap

What's really amusing about this situation is that even if Sam came in here and said the chips are half fucked but we have an engineer on route to help us fix the situation, then the stock would double in price.

I think he wants the stock low now, I bet the team are buying now and will end up with 50% of the company on the cheap

OT, but I find it fascinating that time after time, this bitcoin experiment shows us the usefulness of so many existing regulations that die hard libertarians love to hate. Things like registering a security, so that potential investors know all the relevant facts about the people and the business they are investing in. Rules against insider trading and stock manipulation as hinted at above, and disclosure requirements that would force labcoin to come clean about the actual status of their business making this more an investment than a lottery. The need for an organisation that verifies and enforces this, since you cant trust the exchanges, let alone the issuers. We already learned what happens when you allow ponzi schemes (pirate) or known felons to play 'bank' (mybitcoin). BFL customers are finding out that FTC rules about shipping delays and refunds perhaps arent so daft. Heck, they are even learning that evil old Paypal has its uses too.

Many libertarians were or are convinced bitcoin would show just how good a totally free market can work. Its showing me the exact opposite: t doesnt work without some sensible regulation, it becomes a scammer's and gamblers paradise, not a functional economy.

What's really amusing about this situation is that even if Sam came in here and said the chips are half fucked but we have an engineer on route to help us fix the situation, then the stock would double in price.

I think he wants the stock low now, I bet the team are buying now and will end up with 50% of the company on the cheap

OT, but I find it fascinating that time after time, this bitcoin experiment shows us the usefulness of so many existing regulations that die hard libertarians love to hate. Things like registering a security, so that potential investors know all the relevant facts about the people and the business they are investing in. Rules against insider trading and stock manipulation as hinted at above, and disclosure requirements that would force labcoin to come clean about the actual status of their business making this more an investment than a lottery. The need for an organisation that verifies and enforces this, since you cant trust the exchanges, let alone the issuers. We already learned what happens when you allow ponzi schemes (pirate) or known felons to play 'bank' (mybitcoin). BFL customers are finding out that FTC rules about shipping delays and refunds perhaps arent so daft. Heck, they are even learning that evil old Paypal has its uses too.

Many libertarians were or are convinced bitcoin would show just how good a totally free market can work. Its showing me the exact opposite: t doesnt work without some sensible regulation, it becomes a scammer's and gamblers paradise, not a functional economy.

What's really amusing about this situation is that even if Sam came in here and said the chips are half fucked but we have an engineer on route to help us fix the situation, then the stock would double in price.

I think he wants the stock low now, I bet the team are buying now and will end up with 50% of the company on the cheap

OT, but I find it fascinating that time after time, this bitcoin experiment shows us the usefulness of so many existing regulations that die hard libertarians love to hate. Things like registering a security, so that potential investors know all the relevant facts about the people and the business they are investing in. Rules against insider trading and stock manipulation as hinted at above, and disclosure requirements that would force labcoin to come clean about the actual status of their business making this more an investment than a lottery. The need for an organisation that verifies and enforces this, since you cant trust the exchanges, let alone the issuers. We already learned what happens when you allow ponzi schemes (pirate) or known felons to play 'bank' (mybitcoin). BFL customers are finding out that FTC rules about shipping delays and refunds perhaps arent so daft. Heck, they are even learning that evil old Paypal has its uses too.

Many libertarians were or are convinced bitcoin would show just how good a totally free market can work. Its showing me the exact opposite: t doesnt work without some sensible regulation, it becomes a scammer's and gamblers paradise, not a functional economy.

+1 for that.

No, more like -9000 for forgetting status quo non-libertarian hyper-regulation created the conditions which inspired/necessitated Satoshi to release Bitcoin.

Let me remind everyone about MF Global, Too Big To Fail, Central Banking (from the Fed to the BIS), TARP, NAFTA, Government Motors, and the rest of the Great Bailout.

If you don't like Bitcoin denominated markets, go play on NASDAQ with your eTrade account.

"The difference between bad and well-developed digital cash will determine whether we have a dictatorship or a real democracy." David Chaum 1996"Fungibility provides privacy as a side effect." Adam Back 2014

jurisdictions. they matter and are freaking confusing to deal with regardless

If US shareholders have been effected then this is by default SEC territory. The US government is tireless in it's hunt for multimillion dollar fraudsters. International extradition warrents take a day to sort out and almost every country in the Western World has an agreement to uphold these extradition warrents.

no it's not. that is just utter bullshit. US is not world police. unless they can prove US citizens were TARGETED specifically than maybeeeeeeeee and that's a maybe. US shareholders can be affected by anything in the world a sneeze and a fart as well doesn't mean that gives US the reach to other jurisdictions.

Yeah, these people blathering on about the SEC and US laws. The company isn't in the U.S, It's founders aren't US Citizens.

Companies and people outside of the US don't need to comply with US laws. If it's actually a fraud, then obviously that will probably be illegal wherever they are. But there's no reason to assume that all countries have the same regulations about securities, in particular securities that are sold for things other then traditional money.

If you have something specific about HK law, Italian law, or whatever feel free to post it. But it isn't the case that everyone in the world needs to follow US law.

jurisdictions. they matter and are freaking confusing to deal with regardless

If US shareholders have been effected then this is by default SEC territory. The US government is tireless in it's hunt for multimillion dollar fraudsters. International extradition warrents take a day to sort out and almost every country in the Western World has an agreement to uphold these extradition warrents.

no it's not. that is just utter bullshit. US is not world police. unless they can prove US citizens were TARGETED specifically than maybeeeeeeeee and that's a maybe. US shareholders can be affected by anything in the world a sneeze and a fart as well doesn't mean that gives US the reach to other jurisdictions.

Yeah, these people blathering on about the SEC and US laws. The company isn't in the U.S, It's founders aren't US Citizens.

Companies and people outside of the US don't need to comply with US laws. If it's actually a fraud, then obviously that will probably be illegal wherever they are. But there's no reason to assume that all countries have the same regulations about securities, in particular securities that are sold for things other then traditional money.

If you have something specific about HK law, Italian law, or whatever feel free to post it. But it isn't the case that everyone in the world needs to follow US law.

Not to take anyones side in this argument but this isnt correct. If you are providing service from wherever to US citizens US authorities will be interested.Look what happened to online poker.

But it isn't the case that everyone in the world needs to follow US law.

As you have been told a million times, it doesnt matter where the company issuing the stock is incorporated (afaik labcoin isnt even incorporated). You have to follow US law when soliciting funds for unregistered securities from (unsophisticated) US citizens in the US. Even less doubt if the promoter/agent is a US citizen living in the US.

What the securities are about is of no importance, you cant promote and sell unregistered Nigerian stocks in the US, just because Nigerian law would allow it.

There is a reason Burnside at some point planned to deny access to his exchange for US citizens, but you seem to daft to grasp why.

But it isn't the case that everyone in the world needs to follow US law.

As you have been told a million times, it doesnt matter where the company issuing the stock is incorporated (afaik labcoin isnt even incorporated). You have to follow US law when soliciting funds for unregistered securities from (unsophisticated) US citizens in the US. Even less doubt if the promoter/agent is a US citizen living in the US.

What the securities are about is of no importance, you cant promote and sell unregistered Nigerian stocks in the US, just because Nigerian law would allow it.

There is a reason Burnside at some point planned to deny access to his exchange for US citizens, but you seem to daft to grasp why.

Please explain how the dumb and mighty USA want to enforce their regulations on people sitting in Hongkong or Italy.I am very interested in that.

no it's not. that is just utter bullshit. US is not world police. unless they can prove US citizens were TARGETED specifically than maybeeeeeeeee and that's a maybe. US shareholders can be affected by anything in the world a sneeze and a fart as well doesn't mean that gives US the reach to other jurisdictions.

That's complete conjecture. Do you have any evidence to suggest the US wont be interested in a multimillion dollar scam when US citizens start complaining. You think they will do nothing? There are UK citizens extradicted to the US every year for similar frauds.

The US government being "interested" in something doesn't mean it can actually do anything. Just look at the MegaUpload case, for example. MegaUpload wasn't based in the U.S, didn't do business in the US and as a result the US government can't actually do anything about it.

If it was an outright fraud, then obviously they'll face serious legal issues wherever they reside. If it's not a fraud, and just a case of incompetence then the legal issues will be less serious. Their IPO may not have violated local securities regulations any more then kickstarter would have (or it may have, I'm not an expert on HK law - and neither is anyone else around here)

[22:45] <StalkBot> Estimated hashrate between the last 4 deposits [3031.31 GH/sec][22:45] <StalkBot> Mining 0.41451209 over 1 hour, 1 second at 148819200 difficulty[22:45] <StalkBot> Team 'labcoin' not in the top 25 at BTCGuild page -> http://tinyurl.com/k7357rj

Thoughts?

I'm pretty sure they have multiple BTCGuild accounts pointed to that address, well either they or some third party. If you do an auto pay, you get exactly that much each hour. If you get an auto-pay every hour then excess builds up. But that means you should only see large payments every once in a while as they flush the excess from one account.

On the other hand, if you have multiple accounts you can build up excess in both, and flush either at any time. One might not have an auto-pay at all.

It's not really all that relevant because they're clearly not mining enough to make their stock recover given their disastrous performance over the past week or so.

The US government being "interested" in something doesn't mean it can actually do anything. Just look at the MegaUpload case, for example. MegaUpload wasn't based in the U.S, didn't do business in the US and as a result the US government can't actually do anything about it.

Not to take anyones side in this argument but this isnt correct. If you are providing service from wherever to US citizens US authorities will be interested.Look what happened to online poker.

First of all, people in the US were able to play online poker for years without any trouble. What changed is that the US made it illegal for people to help transfer money for US citizens for the purposes of gambling.

That meant that you couldn't transfer money from your bank account (in the US) to a poker site directly, because in order for that to happen you had to do business in the US, and that basically made it impossible for regular people to play.

Secondly, the US government may get involved if people are being actively scammed (ala pirateat40) and they may try to get someone extradited. On the other hand, if all they did was issue securities that were legal in their country it seems unlikely they would care.

All of this legal theorizing about securities registration applies equally to Freidcat and ASICMiner. Are the people in here really claiming that the US government is going to hunt down Freidcat and try to prosecute him for issuing unregistered securities?

Those legal concerns apply equally to all bitcoin stocks, including ASICMiner, as well as ActiveMining (which at even greater risk given the fact that they're US based) - Those legal issues were the same before anyone ever heard of Labcoin, and they were a background issue. Everyone understood them (or should have) when they bought the shares.

Yet, suddenly everyone is complaining about this stock in particular because it isn't performing well. If the price haddn't tanked I doubt you'd see nearly as much speculation about it.

Either way, assuming that US law applies to everyone around the world and that the SEC has global jurisdiction is just ridiculous.

Please explain how the dumb and mighty USA want to enforce their regulations on people sitting in Hongkong or Italy.I am very interested in that.

Theswede doesnt seem to be sitting in HK, nor does Howard Wang. Those that are abroad could still be charged and found guilty in the US for soliciting funds in the US from US citizens. Whether or not they would demand extradition or if HK or Italy would grant it is a moot point.

But it isn't the case that everyone in the world needs to follow US law.

As you have been told a million times, it doesnt matter where the company issuing the stock is incorporated (afaik labcoin isnt even incorporated). You have to follow US law when soliciting funds for unregistered securities from (unsophisticated) US citizens in the US. Even less doubt if the promoter/agent is a US citizen living in the US.

What the securities are about is of no importance, you cant promote and sell unregistered Nigerian stocks in the US, just because Nigerian law would allow it.

There is a reason Burnside at some point planned to deny access to his exchange for US citizens, but you seem to daft to grasp why.

Burnside has to follow US law because he lives in the US, dumbass.

Also, Nigeria actually has very strict banking regulation compared to other countries, and 419 scams have always been illegal there, that's why they're called 419s, that's the legal code they violate. The government there prosecutes people who do it all the time. (They're actually rather embarrassed about this reputation they've earned)

If you sold shares in a scam stock in Nigeria, you'd be prosecuted, if caught. But the reason you'd be prosecuted is because you would have broken Nigerian law, not because you broke US law.

If labcoin is a total scam, then obviously the people behind face serious legal consiquences. This would be true if they were based in Nigeria, Taiwan, Italy, Cyprus, wherever. On the other hand, if they're not a scam then the only relevant issue is the legality of the securities. For example, it appears that it's not illegal in Belize.

That issue applies equally to all stocks based outside of the US like ASICMiner, NEOBEE and so on. If the US government is actually going to try to go after people outside the US simply for "violating" SEC regulations then those companies are also at risk.

Finally, the job of the SEC is to protect shareholders. That means that if they go after these people, they would try to recover the value that shareholders lost. Also all they do is levy fines, usually pretty small ones. The Pirateat40 case was the FBI, not the SEC, because that was a scam - not a violation of securities regulation